Chuck,

Like Alan Dershowitz I do not oppose torture in all cases. Also, I frankly couldn’t care less about the hazing that went on at AbuG. My point, again, is that there are circumstances where we indeed will torture suspects who have “ticking bomb”-style information that must be extracted if thousands of lives are to be saved.

And that under no circumstances should we torture– again, not frat-house hazing but shocks, beatings, and as happened in many cases at AbuG, actual killing– innocent suspects who have no “ticking-bomb” information to disclose.

Did we torture Khalid Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 plot? Of course. Did we torture someone to get info that led us to Saddam’s spider-hole? Probably. Does that bother me? Only if innocent people with no links to, or crucial information about, the terrorists were tortured.

In short, we’re walking a tightrope. As I’ve said before, this is not a dirty war conducted in secret. Though Khalid M was probably taken to an aircraft carrier somewhere in Asia, the vast majority of those we interrogate will be in places where hostile media, the Red Cross et al are scrutinizing our actions.

You and I can decry the media circus all we like– I flip the dial every time NPR goes to a story about Lynndie or Mindy or Mork’s AbuG funhouse– but the fact is that PR is a crucial weapon in this war.

It would therefore greatly behoove us to clarify, for our own public and “a candid world”, how we intend to gather the information we need to defuse ticking bombs while still remaining on the side of the angels.

I support Bush (for the most part). Wouldn’t it be nice to be ahead of the media curve and on top the PR game for once? Is it too much to ask of our president and his men to apply some political skill, cunning, smoothness, and smarts to the PR side of this war?